Hascall v. Whitmore
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Assumpsit on a note of hand dated June 30th, 1835, for $400, signed by the defendant and payable to one Sumner Stone or order, on or before the 30th of June, 1839, and endorsed by said Stone in blank. The plaintiffs were not partners, but each separately and at different times purchased one half of the note declared on.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit on a note of hand dated June 30th, 1835, for $400, signed by the defendant and payable to one Sumner Stone or order, on or before the 30th of June, 1839, and endorsed by said Stone in blank. The plaintiffs were not partners, but each separately and at different times purchased one half of the note declared on. It appeared in evidence in the defence, that Daniel Brown, Sumner Stone and one Springer had verbally agreed to purchase a tract of timber land and mills in the town of Livermore, of one Brittun, for thirty thousand dollars, and were to complete the bargain on the 30th June,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Siummv J.
The plaintiii’s are joint owners of a negotiable promissory note purchased before it became pa 'able. One of *106tliem is a holder for value without, notice; the other with notice, but deriving his title through others who were bona fide holders without notice. . As between the original parties the note' may be regarded as made without consideration. Andrews, who was the first and an innocent indorsee for value, did not endorse it, when he disposed of it, and he was properly admitted as a witness. Whitaker v. Brown, 8 Wend. 490. He could have…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Whitaker v. BrownCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1832
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hereth v. Merchants' National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
- Thomas v. RuddellIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
- Simon v. MerrittSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
- Woollen v. BankerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern Ohio · 1877
- Very v. RussellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1874